Editorial: Gay marriage backers are right to think beyond California

A month before the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments for and against Proposition 8, the stakes have been raised - and so have hopes for the sweeping constitutional ruling that opponents of California's nonsensical ban on gay marriage deserve.

In preparing their case, Prop. 8 foes have faced a couple of strategic issues: Should attorneys for gay and lesbian couples seek a ruling that applies only to California, or one that asserts the right to same-sex marriage nationwide?

Should the Obama administration weigh in, or should the federal government stay out of an issue that is, on paper, about state policy?

The attorneys made the right call. In legal briefs, they urged the Supreme Court to make the broadest possible ruling, to strike down the gay-marriage prohibition in 40 states as a "badge of inferiority, separateness and inequality. "

Now Obama should think big, too. Having already asked the Supreme Court to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act barring federal benefits for same-sex couples, the administration should file a brief in opposition to Prop. 8 by Thursday's deadline.

The justices will hear arguments in the Prop. 8 case on March 26 and in the Defense of Marriage Act case the next day.

Specifically, next month's Prop. 8 case is a challenge of the 2012 ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that the 2008 ballot initiative was unconstitutional because it took away a right previously granted by the California Supreme Court.

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling this year could target only the particulars of the California controversy.

This would happen if the justices focused on the narrow question of whether a right can be taken away. Or if they denied the appeal on technical grounds having to do with the gay-marriage opponents' legal standing.

No doubt, many gay and lesbian couples in California would settle for such a decision because it would make same-sex weddings legal in the state.

Theoretically, with public support for gay marriage on the rise, other states eventually would join the modern world.

But there is more at stake here. The very heart of the outrage over Prop. 8 is that a constitutional question should not be decided by public opinions.

The 14th Amendment dictates that gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities as traditional couples. The alternative is rank discrimination.

This is a matter of American principle. The anti-Prop. 8 lawyers are making that argument. The Obama administration should, too.